From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Roman Mamedov Subject: Re: data corruption after rebuild Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 22:48:19 +0600 Message-ID: <20110719224819.7aa5582d@natsu> References: <2073005.NH8LALaxuD@bloomfield> <20110719211240.2578bba6@natsu> <4879002.CX4iSyfhxZ@bloomfield> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/WqFbqoATtx1lxEcDBU2twx3"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4879002.CX4iSyfhxZ@bloomfield> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Pavel Herrmann Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids --Sig_/WqFbqoATtx1lxEcDBU2twx3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 19 Jul 2011 18:35:26 +0200 Pavel Herrmann wrote: > On Tuesday 19 of July 2011 21:12:40 Roman Mamedov wrote: > > > I do monthly scans, so the redundancy syndromes should have been > > > up-to-date, the array is made of 8 disks, the setup is ext4 on lvm on > > > mdraid > >=20 > > Did you notice any nonzero mismatch_cnt during those scans? >=20 > oh crap, the rebuild finished with >=20 > Jul 19 09:41:24 Bloomfield mdadm[3996]: RebuildFinished event detected on= md device /dev/md0, component device mismatches found: 3184 >=20 > this is really bad i presume?=20 Well, this basically tells you what you already know - a part of the data y= ou have was corrupted. In this case I think it's 3184 512-byte sectors, whi= ch is about 1.6MB total. How it got there and how to prevent that from happening in the future - tha= t's a whole different question. --=20 With respect, Roman --Sig_/WqFbqoATtx1lxEcDBU2twx3 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk4ltVMACgkQTLKSvz+PZwj7wACfZrCVJ/nBUzg1ElhM1R+FEKtL zgUAn0o8rPHOPmc9yULdD3XXduoujtLN =+Qhk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/WqFbqoATtx1lxEcDBU2twx3--